Windows Blue: How Will Windows 8 Evolve?

Windows Blue, Microsoft's alleged follow-up to Windows 8, may emerge by June. One prediction: Don't hold your breath for a retreat from the tiled look.

Microsoft Surface Pro: Is It Right For You?

(click image for larger view and for slideshow)

For months now, Windows Blue has been the software equivalent of Sasquatch -- which is to say, much-discussed, seldom glimpsed and possibly not what everyone assumes. Big Foot has yet to stomp from folklore into reality, but recent leaks suggest that Windows Blue will make its public debut relatively soon, perhaps as early as June. Microsoft has been mostly mum on the alleged Windows 8 update, refusing to officially verify that it exists. Even so, the rumors have begun to converge around common themes. How does Redmond intend to make its new, touch-friendly OS gain momentum?

Claims posted in February to Win8China, meanwhile, suggest Windows Blue will become a public preview in June, with general availability slated for August. Other rumors making the rounds: Windows Blue will be built on a new kernel, include Internet Explorer 11 and offer faster computing while consuming less power. Windows Blue could also be a free upgrade intended to bolster adoption.

Reading into the few tea leaves, though, one can divine a few insights into Microsoft's approach. Faster update cycles mean that new features will reach end users more quickly. Windows 8 might be the newest version of a longstanding product, but because it departs so heavily from previous editions, it's essentially a Version 1 release in many respects. To gain market share, Redmond needs to offer a more polished user experience. It will get there much more quickly if it offers iterative enhancements every 12 months, rather than monolithic refreshes every couple of years.

Also significant is the implication that Microsoft is further unifying its Windows family around common code. On the desktop side, Redmond's application offerings lead the class, but the company isn't yet competitive with Apple or Google's respective mobile portfolios. By making it easier for developers to write a single application for all Windows flavors, Microsoft would be addressing one of its glaring weaknesses.

At the same time, the rumors have suggested that UI tweaks will be confined to making the tile-based Modern start screen into a more cohesive experience. Microsoft seems intent on conditioning users to its new platform, so anyone hoping for a major change, such as the reintegration of the Start Menu, is likely to be disappointed.

All Eyes On Mobile Apps

Businesses are curious about Windows 8 but "they were expecting something more," said Paulo Camara, head of mobility services at Ci&T, a Brazilian IT services provider with clients around the world. In an interview, he noted that enterprises have typically waited for a service pack before adopting a new version of Windows. Windows 8 is a bit different, he said, because its advantages over Windows 7 are mostly geared toward mobility, leaving desktop users fewer reasons to upgrade.

He said he expects Windows Blue "not to reinvent things but maybe to tweak them to make them more user-friendly." Certain applications behave differently in Windows 8's Modern interface than they do in the browser's more familiar Explorer mode, for example, and Microsoft would please some customers by simply smoothing over these wrinkles.

According to Michael Cherry, a Windows expert with Directions on Microsoft, Windows Blue is unlikely to change Windows 8's primary philosophy. In an interview, he said Microsoft executives "love to use gambling expressions" such as "we're all in" or "we've bet everything" to describe their newest OS. If Redmond were to back off now, he said, developers would feel discouraged from writing for the newest Windows platforms.

Cherry additionally said that Redmond seems resolved to roll through the early Windows 8 criticism. "Those concerns were raised well before they shipped [Windows 8]. When I look at it, I see no interest or inclination [from Microsoft] in taking that feedback," he stated. "I don't see that anything's changed that, despite Mr. Sinofsky leaving."

Microsoft should dedicate Windows Blue largely to improving the platform's app ecosystem, Cherry said. He noted that Microsoft's pre-installed apps aren't impressive, and that developers might not have the guidance they need. "If Microsoft can't even write compelling apps for it, it's safe to assume it's tough to write apps for that platform," he said.

"Nobody can tell us an app for Windows 8 that they just have to have," Cherry continued, adding that one "can debate whether the UI is right or not" but that killer apps are the key to use cases that will drive adoption. He mentioned that the iPad didn't have an extensive catalogue when it launched either, and that comparisons between iOS and Windows 8 are thus a little unfair. Still, he said, one can argue that it's "Microsoft's fault for not [addressing mobile platforms] years earlier."

Attend Interop Las Vegas, May 6-10, and attend the most thorough training on Apple Deployment at the NEW Mac & iOS IT Conference. Use Priority Code DIPR02 by March 2 to save up to $500 off the price of Conference Passes. Join us in Las Vegas for access to 125+ workshops and conference classes, 350+ exhibiting companies, and the latest technology. Register for Interop today!

microsoft needs more time to polish the system to make it better, more complete and almost perfect. id like to see a only 1 or 2 versions of windows, with only 64 (x64) bits with 32 bits (x86) capabilities of course. maybe with the starter office 2013 included like the RT version. and of course, with all languages included to install or use on the disc.

maybe someday will see that. os x and linux they have already that options.

I am an 'IT guy'; I manage and administer staff and technology for a living.

My staff and I have been using 8 as primary for months from Beta trhrough Production. @ Home and @ work.

Absolutley non of the interface changes are an improvement for anyone who uses as more than a giant iPhone; aside from being unfamiliar, the changes are not intuitive or more effective. Charms, Corners & Start are just some obvious fluff that provides no improvements.

YES - under the hood the power is improved, but not fantastically so.

The UI is a hindrance, is inappropriate and MS is missing the point that MOST users do NOT need a more powerful tablet, or PC -- users never needed that power and now they have options that make sense in a lower power tablet that is lighter and has much longer battery life.

All of the improvements that have substance are easily integrated into 7, app performance and behavior can be consistent independent of the primary UI.

The idea that my phone/tablet/desktop UI should be similar ignores fundamental ergonomics and usage patterns.

Why people struggle to defend this misstep, and worse refer to 'stupid' users is just farcical to me. Despite those rare, vociferous defenders/proponents, the vast majority of technical users despise it, most causal users are uncomfortable with it, and those casual users listen to guys like me and my team, and no one anywhere is recommending 8, but in fact disdaining it.

Check what the big boys are doing - abandoing MS ship, from investors to corporate IT, even game dev is moving towards linux both due to poor W8 reception and developer preference.

Modern is NOT modern, and it wasn't when it was Metro.

I like some of the features of the UI - if they were optional, so I could implement them only in appropriate scenarios like shared kiosks or casual use stations. MS is 'all in' and wont give me back my start menu? well Win 7 will carry for at least 4 more years, and in the meantime cloud based application solutions will defeat the need for a specific OS anyway, so get a a clue MS, or get the boot.

Gates is keeping his mouth shut for a reason (or 1000)

None of this is irrational, or misguided - this is a bad design with some slightly good ideas muddled into it. Not a releaseable product, and MS will most certainly adapt or continue its decline.

For all my defending of Win 8, I will say one thing that I agree with the complainers about. As the person who makes these decisions in my company - and in need of some upgrades, I had to decide on whether or not to upgrade my accounting department to Windows 8. I chose not to. I don't like to miss out on the newest, (hopefully helpful) things, and I also didn't want to miss out on a 'free' upgrade when I may need to purchase it later. However, I couldn't justify the learning curve of my people just to have the new thing. In addition, even though our primary accounting software is a MS product, I did have some issues with it on my test PC. I'm not sure why and it may have been a fluke, but until I could fully test and have full support, I couldn't risk it. Some enhancements (like the copy file dialog) can be invaluable on occasion, there's not real obvious reason to upgrade beyond just because we can.

I'm not doubting your experience, but I find it unique. In all my reading, Win8 actually did benchmark better than Win7. I agree(d) that there wasn't a great reason to upgrade unless I wanted the app functionality (which I did). After reading, I decided to do some tests myself. I performed fresh installs of Win 8 on a 7 year old Dell Dimension 2.8GHz Pentium with 2 GB RAM, and also on a 1st Gen Lenovo S10 netbook. (About the slowest 1gen Atom with 1GB RAM). In addition, I performed a Win7 - Win8 upgrade on a dual-boot Macbook Pro that's about 5 years old (Dual Core Pentium with 2GB RAM if I recall correctly.) All booted quicker, searched locally quicker, were snappier, and functioned overall well and better than Win7. I forgot, I also upgraded a 6 year old Gateway AIO (can't remember the specs) for my nieces for a Christmas Present. Overall, the new OS brought new life to old systems. Not only did they perform well, but it actually gave me reason to use them for the new functionality. In all of my experience, Win 8 has performed better than Win 7 and Win XP. And, if I don't complain about the changes and embrace them, the systems are actually more usable with apps, better interaction with copying dialogs and other enhancements.

The points are all valid and unfortunately, perception is reality. Still, most of the arguments I hear are based on the past. Companies - especially tech and software companies - have to respond to the future plans - including, unfortunately, industry buzz. When iPad took off, there were a lot of people who said it was a fad and served no real business purpose. I might have even agreed if, in my job, I didn't find immediate business uses for it. (What I did find is that as much as I love my iPhone and using the tablet, there was a lot it couldn't do for my business - mostly because of Apple-political - not technical - limitations.). Which brings me to my point. MS has to revolve and react. I agree they need to make improvements to Win 8, but a lot of the hate is about staying in the desktop market or not forcing the changes. While it might pan out that this move is a mistake or they may do it the wrong way, I don't think you can fault them for the path they chose. On paper anyway (and prices aside), they are offering a competing tablet that can theoretically do everything that your PC does (including 1000's of things the iPad and Android cannot. Try adding ANY printer you have lying around to iPad or Android and then do the same with an Intel WIn8 tablet). You can then argue "that's fine for tablets but what about my desktop"? Well, they have that covered - again maybe needing some improvements, but that takes time just as it has with any company. What they are offering is One System. One Windows for tablets, PC's, and hopefully phones. Granted Apple products are simple, but for a laymen, there's still a learning curve between a Macbook and an iPad. Again, it remains to be seen, but MS' solution is to have them all the same. (On a side note, I think the tie-in with Skydrive, etc. works better than Apple's options for pushing the cloud integration - reducing the need for backups and insane amounts of storage.) Personally, I believe it's logical, intelligent, and possibly even necessary. If they tweak some things, they could be the only company in 2-3 years that will have an option that any hardware or software you own will work on any form factor device you choose. Maybe they'll simply succeed in forcing Apple and Android to offer one system solutions. Or, maybe I'm wrong and it'll all crumble. Still, I think it's a smart risk and I hope they succeed.

Agreed that it isn't right. My complaints with it are that you can't group tiles into folders. Also, moving tiles where you want is a pain - especially with touch. Sometimes you may want 3 side-by-side and you can't. Having the limitations is a problem and not necessary. Apple (iPhone) did this initially but they finally made some improvements. Still, per my rant above, finding a program on Windows 8 is much easier than Win7. (With touch or keyboard. Just start typing.)

I have a lot of comments to make, but I have to say I just don't get the Start Menu argument. Michael, what's your input? I agree the Start screen needs improvement and there are some other concerns, but the Start Menu is one thing I'm glad to see go. I would never have thought I'd say that until I actually used Windows 8. I now never have to click Start, and browse through nested folders to open something. I just type. I don't have to click search and type. I just type. Want to open Word, just type Word. Outlook? Type Outlook. (Actually, just type O-U.) Control Panel? Guess what... type C - O - N, and there it is. I can even type Office and see all the Office programs. I can literally find 5 programs quicker than I can find one with the Start button. It's funny, too, to hear the Mac fanboys complain about it. How often do you use the Apple menu on a Mac. Most people use the Dock. I'll admit I got used to pinning apps to the taskbar in Win7, but then, I'd still have to search for the icon and would sometimes click the wrong one (or any) by mistake. With Win 8, I still find it easier to simply start typing. A lot of Win8 complaints are valid but this is just people's hesitation to change.

I think Microsoft has a case in enterprises, specially because interoperability between different devices (desktops, tablets, smartphones) plus BYOD is an issue in most companies. If W8 is able to delivery consistently its promise of a single platform + UX, it is a compelling scenario for lots of different line of business.

Imagine, for instance, a company looking for a single solution for their sales force, who work part in the office and part in the field. Currently these guys probably share two or more solutions with similar purposes: a web tool for the desktop, a native app for their tablets, a different one for their smartphones. Besides the inefficiency, it adds costs with lots of integrations running behind the curtains. Or the companies which do not invest on porting their current solutions to mobile as they will need to replicate business logic on different platforms.

W8 could be an answer for this problem. And Windows still is the platform leader in enterprises.

However as I mentioned during the conversation we had, I feel companies were looking for something more and the first contacts with W8 have not been revolutionary. So they are holding their moves. I personally believe Microsoft is still in the game. It is a big company, it knows how to play the enterprise game and it is convinced that W8 (and its next versions) is the only way to open this door or close it definitively.